I have successfully used a polariser on the DA12-24mm, not so much for sky but for water. No reason not to have one except how fiddly it gets.

Here's a recent example. In this image the difference in light intensity across the frame was enormous. I had to pull the exposure down 1EV or so and then bracketed three shots +-/1.5EV. I had no tripod and so rested the camera on the railing you see in the foreground bottom. (In other cases I have put the camera on the ground, braced myself firmly in a corner, etc.)

Had I not bracketed, the light streaming in the window would have completely burnt out the grating, even if I tried everything possible to rescue the RAW file.



old winding way on Flickr

By the way, one can "manually HDR" in an image editor rather easily. Simply stack one exposure over another, whether these were cooked from the same RAW file or not. Make the top one 50% opaque so you can align exactly. Change it back to full opacity and add a layer mask. Fill the mask with black so the top image is not displayed at all. Then paint in the mask with white, likely with a rather large brush, fill/opacity 50%. The areas you paint will show up on the top layer as an overlay. With soft edges, etc. this can look perfectly natural.

That's what I did to fix the window region.

Let me see, how can I put this simply?

You are wrong and Smeggy is right.

You answered your own question. We care about pixel counts because, all else being equal, we get less noise with fewer pixels in the same sensor area. If the 16MP sensor produces great low noise then a 12MP sensor would be even better.

A good point. I'd have been really excited if there were fewer pixels. I guess marketers don't know I exist.

The K-5 is a tweaked K-7 without any killer features. It does not correct oversights that have been plaguing the line for a while. To give but two examples: it still does not allow for tethered shooting and it looks like there is no option to turn off dark frame subtraction for long exposures. Pentax could easily add these and other features that send certain photographers to the competition.

Instead they have added a faster shooting rate and improved AF, but these are still no match for much of what Canikon already offers. Trying to compete head-on with the big brands will not work, since Pentax can never offer the range of lenses, accessories and service plans of the market leaders. They should be carving out a niche by appealing to the particular needs of their following. In part they do this, but are not attentive enough. And their marketing is dire.

If this drives K-7 prices down then I might be able to afford one eventually. Other than that it is Yet Another Body. And next year there will be another. All will take great pictures.

That sounds like bafflegab and the link points to an advertisement for someone's grey card. Any real info on this you can share?

(No point comparing different sensor sizes, BTW, as obviously a larger sensor or film will allow more detail.)

I'd like to point out that things were a lot worse with film, which is why photographers developed ways and means to cope. A polarising filter is essential to kill highlights from water and vegetation. A graduated ND can tone down sky so that it fits into the available dynamic range. Waiting for the soft evening light and waking early for the morning light are two time-honoured traditions. Knowing the Lake District I'd wait for a nice thunderstorm.

I am curious though that you say you could not solve the problem even while "bracketing like crazy". I have found that there's little I cannot do with +/-3 EV bracketing. Digital makes all this so much easier.

What we're saying is it looks like the K-5 does 999 images, not 99. I would wait to be sure, though, as several aspects of the spec sheets are not necessarily jiving with each other.

List price means little. At the risk of repeating myself, it is already on offer for 450 euros above the price of the body.